From ...
From: Erik Naggum
Subject: Re: Reasons for rejecting Lisp (was Re: Newbie questions [Followup to comp.lang.lisp])
Date: 1999/05/07
Message-ID: <3135027926977088@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 474973363
References: <87g15ee8ss.fsf@foobar.orion.no> <372e265f.2137369@news.select.net> <87d80hdy1t.fsf@foobar.orion.no> <372fb91b.39706364@news.select.net> <87aevldw62.fsf@foobar.orion.no> <7gnhjt$p9q$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <4ogk0a72c.fsf@beta.franz.com> <37326dd3.5537740@news.select.net> <3730c96a.978557761@news.earthlink.net> <3730dd05.8761061@news.select.net> <871zgt3ita.fsf@hasdrubal.nmia.com>
mail-copies-to: never
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
* ggleason@unm.edu (Gavin E. Gleason)
| CMUCL alows you to specify types, and I imagine that the commercial
| compilers do as well. Just because it is not specified in ANSI does not
| mean that it does not exist in most implementations... but it would be
| nice if it were specified.
could you give some examples of the types that CMUCL allows that are not
the ANSI standard?
#:Erik